Personally I feel morality is a completely natural process. It is a byproduct of our animal nature.

Morality is neither devine in nature nor is it uniform across cultures. Each group of people has its own moral code.

IMO Morality is mostly based on the collective good over selfish interests. It is a group of codes imposed by the collective.

If morality was imposed from a One True God, it wouldn't vary so widely from culture to culture.

Logged

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

Oh I am a wimp. If I met god today I would probably knuckle under to him just as I would to a dictator. I am not gonna stand on my high horse with hell hanging in the balance. But that is just me (and about all of humanity)

We know that the vast majority of people will yield to authority even if it goes against their grain, otherwise there would be no such thing as a Hitler, Pol Pot, Sadam...

But... all those dictators were real. We have some proof of what they did.

I have no high horse, but I do draw the line at imaginary things (gods) and made up places (like hell). Besides, if this god character turns out to be real, he/she/it/they probably would not be impressed by my faking belief in him/her/it/them on some variant of Pascal's wager.

Besides, why be afraid of god (YHWH) and not zeus, mithras, etc.? They could all be as nasty to you as biblegod for not knuckling under to them, if you go that route. It ends up getting confusing...

Logged

If xian hell really exists, the stench of the burning billions of us should be a constant, putrid reminder to the handful of heavenward xians how loving your god is. - neopagan

A god that allegedly used to show up 3,000 years ago, a kid that was supposedly here, briefly, 2,000 years ago, and both only for the benefit of a tiny backwater group of desert dwellers, cannot take credit for, or hope to usefully influence, people in 2013.

Moral standards have been expressed by cultures for ages. Granted, they differ from group to group, though axioms like the golden rule tend to get expressed across societies. It is apparent from studying other primates that we have some built in moral standards, plus some built in double standards as well. So we combine the cross-pollination of cultures, our genes, common sense, maybe a little Anthony Weiner-type public shame and as many examples of approved standards as we can muster, and we humans are sort of able to be fairly moral on our own. Yes, there are exceptions, but in a world where free will isn't free, power isn't nice and selfishness wins too much, we aren't doing all that bad.

There is always room for improvement. And most of us are moral enough to realize that.

Logged

Anyone can beat around the bush. But unless you have permission from the bush, you probably shouldn't.

My nation had no knowledge of a Biblegod or his "moral code" till the mid 1700's...His followers showed their morality by killing us by the thousands with small pox infected blankets and stealing our territories and plundering any valuable resource.

Logged

There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Personally I feel morality is a completely natural process. It is a byproduct of our animal nature.

Morality is neither devine in nature nor is it uniform across cultures. Each group of people has its own moral code.

IMO Morality is mostly based on the collective good over selfish interests. It is a group of codes imposed by the collective.

I work with a man who is almost young enough to be my son who is my supervisor and is also a devout evangelical Christian. We have some good talks about religion and we both respect each others point of view and don't try and change one another. I think that a thing about me which fascinates him is that although I'm an atheist I am one of the most moral persons he knows and that sort of threw his former preconceived notions for a loop because he once would have thought I would have horns and live an immoral life.

As the OP says, morality has developed as a survival trait. Humans tend to work better in communities and communities tend to work better when regulated by codes of behaviour.

Religion seems to have developed as an uber stick to go with the developmental carrot.Back in the bronze age telling folks that they were being watched 24/7 by an invisible man and any infringement of the "rules" would be punishable by said invisible man would have been a go(o)d motivator to keep the community in check.

Morality[1] has evolved once again with laws and CCTV taking over the mantle from religion.

edit: I feel compelled to name check screwtape here as this oppinion has been formed from conversations i've had with him.

Is morality proof of god? Nope. Given that most moralities would denounce many of Yahweh's actions as savage and immoral if they were carried out by any other being, I have to say no - how could it? How and why could a god instil a morality that it itself does not uphold?

Personally I feel morality is a completely natural process. It is a byproduct of our animal nature.

Morality is neither devine in nature nor is it uniform across cultures. Each group of people has its own moral code.

IMO Morality is mostly based on the collective good over selfish interests. It is a group of codes imposed by the collective.

I work with a man who is almost young enough to be my son who is my supervisor and is also a devout evangelical Christian. We have some good talks about religion and we both respect each others point of view and don't try and change one another. I think that a thing about me which fascinates him is that although I'm an atheist I am one of the most moral persons he knows and that sort of threw his former preconceived notions for a loop because he once would have thought I would have horns and live an immoral life.

I have a coworker who is a real thumper, we have known eachother for years and our battle lines are pretty much drawn:) But one funny thing is that I have become his moral compass. He frequently brings his more questionable business dealings and such to me and asks my opinion. From digital piracy, to car dealing he always seems to fall on the wrong side of the bible before asking what I would do:)

What did you do to give him that impression! You said youv'e known each other a number of years, so he must think you're morally inept, because you are.

Because when discussing several topics he found be to have the moral high ground. Probably to his surprise. Ultimately he feels it is gods hand that guides me to the moral choices even though I am very dubious of gods very existence. But since I have convinced him on several subjects that he was not exactly following the teachings of god he now bounces things off me for my POV

What did you do to give him that impression! You said you've known each other a number of years, so he must think you're morally inept, because you are.

Because when discussing several topics he found be to have the moral high ground. Probably to his surprise. Ultimately he feels it is gods hand that guides me to the moral choices even though I am very dubious of gods very existence. But since I have convinced him on several subjects that he was not exactly following the teachings of god he now bounces things off me for my POV

Post #14 did not read that way to me, hence my question. So as I understand it, he believes as he should, if you're an atheist, that you are his moral superior.

You made it sound in post #14 that he came to you with is immoral ideas for your ok.So I'm sorry if I misunderstood.

Logged

We theists have no evidence for our beliefs. So no amount of rational evidence will dissuade us from those beliefs. - JCisall

It would be pretty piss poor brainwashing, if the victims knew they were brainwashed, wouldn't it? - Screwtape. 04/12/12

If morality was imposed from a One True God, it wouldn't vary so widely from culture to culture.

Morality shouldn't vary so much from denominations to denominations, let alone culture to culture.

I don't think it does vary all that much. You can't argue that morality naturally extends from evolution and the human condition, and then say it varies widely. This conflicting argument results because atheists react in a contrarian way, to Christian statements:

Incorrect argument

Christian : The presence of God is shown in humans, because morality is cross culturalAtheist: Morality varies widely, therefore you are wrong.Christian: Oh, you are a moral relativist. Are you saying that eating babies is a good thing?Atheist: Some cultures eat babies.

(this argument quickly loses focus)

Correct argument

Christian : The presence of God is shown in humans, because morality is cross culturalAtheist: Your argument is circular. You assume that because there is a cross cultural similarity, that the only explanation is God.Christian : What other explanation could there be, for the transmission of this information between cultures that have not communicated?Atheist : It is up to you to demonstrate that there is no explanation besides God, before you announce that God did it.Christian: Being a pig ignorant, and brainwashed idiot, I can see no other explanation besides the one I want it to be.Atheist: Thanks for conceding that you are a brainwashed idiot.

Why do you respect his point of view? Or do you not? Do you actually just respect him?

I meant that we respect each others right to choose to believe how each of us believes. He disagrees with my atheistic point of view as I do with his religious point of view, but we agree to disagree without feeling the need to convert the other to our point of view. This actually says a lot about him considering that he is an evangelical and he simply accepts that my choice is to be an atheist.

I have never come across an atheist, who has ever tried to convert anybody, they all know that it is up to the theist to come to his senses. No amount of prodding or pulling will make him change his mind he is the only person that can do that. Atheists merely answer the questions posed by theist in a logical coherent way, there is no attempt to convert. If the theist feels that his beliefs are foolish after reading a reply from an atheist then he will convert himself.

Logged

We theists have no evidence for our beliefs. So no amount of rational evidence will dissuade us from those beliefs. - JCisall

It would be pretty piss poor brainwashing, if the victims knew they were brainwashed, wouldn't it? - Screwtape. 04/12/12

I have never come across an atheist, who has ever tried to convert anybody, they all know that it is up to the theist to come to his senses. No amount of prodding or pulling will make him change his mind he is the only person that can do that. Atheists merely answer the questions posed by theist in a logical coherent way, there is no attempt to convert. If the theist feels that his beliefs are foolish after reading a reply from an atheist then he will convert himself.

Now we're getting caught up with the meaning of "convert". I am sure there have been many atheists who have attempted to convince a theist that the atheist's point of view concerning religion is correct. The atheist may not be trying to "convert" the theist but it comes down to the same thing.

Obviously someone can only change their own mind whether it's religion or politics. In politics they could save a lot of money on political ads if they accepted they cannot change anyone's mind, that people can only change their own minds, that it is up to them to come to their senses.

Evidently this whole concept of atheists not trying to convert anyone is deceptively deep for me and beyond my comprehension or you just have not run across enough atheists to have an accurate sample. Their numbers may be small, but I bet they exist even if I have run across any of them (in real life, not on the internet, I don't think I've come across anyone who has claimed to me to be an atheist--to be honest, as a schizoid I just don't care--people can believe whatever they like as long as they don't impose their beliefs on me).

I have never come across an atheist, who has ever tried to convert anybody, they all know that it is up to the theist to come to his senses. No amount of prodding or pulling will make him change his mind he is the only person that can do that. Atheists merely answer the questions posed by theist in a logical coherent way, there is no attempt to convert. If the theist feels that his beliefs are foolish after reading a reply from an atheist then he will convert himself.

Now we're getting caught up with the meaning of "convert". I am sure there have been many atheists who have attempted to convince a theist that the atheist's point of view concerning religion is correct. The atheist may not be trying to "convert" the theist but it comes down to the same thing.

No atheist tries to persuade someone to change their religious faith or other belief with the intention of converting them. So no it doesn't come down to the same thing.But on the converse it is in religious doctrines to try to persuade people to convert to their way of thinking. All the atheist wants is for people to live and let live, without imposing there beliefs on others. The only thing atheists have in common is there lack of belief in gods.

« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 03:57:23 AM by bertatberts »

Logged

We theists have no evidence for our beliefs. So no amount of rational evidence will dissuade us from those beliefs. - JCisall

It would be pretty piss poor brainwashing, if the victims knew they were brainwashed, wouldn't it? - Screwtape. 04/12/12

If atheists do not try to correct the thinking of believers, then they are not moral atheists.

A moral atheist will have a sense of community consciousness and will not let the community follow poor or wrong ideas that inevitably will hurt people.

Imagine the hellish world we would be living in if no one ever bothered to correct those who were in need of it.

It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are moral religionists as well as those who do not believe. They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief or not. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Beliefs in fantasy, miracles and magic are evil.